Office of Health Disparities Reduction Website

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Study Identifies Factors That Keep New Mothers From Getting the Sleep They Need

Getting a good night’s sleep is
difficult for most new moms. But it may be especially so for lower income
mothers,according to a new studyfrom researchers at the College of
Nursing at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. Sleep deprivation leads to
depression and increased problems in personal relationships. It can also harm a
woman’s health and decrease her productivity, costing society billions of
dollars. While new lower income mothers have more difficulty getting adequate
sleep, the study also suggests that many of the factors that prevent them from
sleeping may be easily overcome.

The study was published in the current issue of
theJournal of
Obstetric, Gynecologic and Neonatal Nursingand was funded by theRobert Wood Johnson Foundation Nurse Faculty
Scholarsprogram and the National Institute of
Nursing Research. The primary investigator was Jennifer Doering, PhD, RN,
associate professor at the University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, College of
Nursing.

The study identified several causes of sleep
deprivation, the most prevalent of which is bed sharing. The research team
found that bed sharing was common among lower income women who are new moms.
Two weeks after giving birth, when asked “who sleeps in bed with you most
nights?” nearly two in five (38 percent) mothers reported sleeping with a male
partner and one in five (19 percent) slept with their newborn, the study found.
About 29 percent of the mothers said they slept with one older child, 8 percent
slept with two older children and 25 percent said they slept alone. In sleep
diaries that were kept four and eight weeks after giving birth, approximately
25 percent of mothers reported sharing a bed with the infant. Mothers also
reported increased bed sharing with their male partners and a decrease in bed
sharing with older children during this same time period.

Doering surveyed 183 new mothers from two Midwestern
hospitals who gave birth to healthy infants and who were on Medicaid. Two weeks
after giving birth, they completed a survey with questions about if and
how often they smoked, how long they watched television and/or listened to the
radio at night, common noises in the sleep environment, where they and their
infants slept, and household size. Study participants also kept three days
and nights of sleep diaries, recording the number of times they woke up at
night, how many caffeinated and/or alcoholic beverages they drank, how much
they smoked, if and with whom they shared a bed and the reasons for sleep
disruption.

The study found that half (52 percent) of
participants slept with the television on part (31 percent) or all of the night
(69 percent). More than four in five (85 percent) mothers in the study drank
caffeine and one in four (24 percent) smoked.Two weeks after giving birth, the mothers were
asked what sounds routinely awakened them at night. More than half the sleep
disruptions were due to the infant. Other common sleep disturbing factors
included sounds of other people or pets in the home, and sounds within the
building or neighbors. At four and eight weeks after giving birth, the infant
was still the most common reason for being awakened. The second most common
factor that interfered with sleep were “family and social issues,” which
included children or family disrupting sleep, losing sleep due to socializing
with friends, conflict with a past partner or the health of a family member.
The third most common reason for interrupted sleep was the mother’s health
including the common cold, headaches, menstruation or mental stressors, such as
depression and anger.

Doering said her research offers a hopeful and
practical pathway forward. “With the necessary modifications, sleep deprived
mothers could well be on their way to more continuous, sound sleep,” she said.

Thursday, December 20, 2012

In the 10th annualReady or Not? Protecting the Public from Diseases,
Disasters, and Bioterrorismreport, 35 states and Washington, D.C. scored a six or lower on 10
key indicators of public health preparedness.

The report found that while there has been significant progress
toward improving public health preparedness over the past 10 years, particularly
in core capabilities, there continue to be persistent gaps in the country's
ability to respond to health emergencies, ranging from bioterrorist threats to
serious disease outbreaks to extreme weather events.

TheReady or Not? report provides a snapshot of our nation's
public health emergency preparedness. Its indicators are developed in
consultation with leading public health experts based on data from publicly
available sources, or information provided by public officials.

Score Summary:

A full list of all of the indicators and scores and the full
report are available on TFAH's website and RWJF's website. For the
state-by-state scoring, states received one point for achieving an indicator or
zero points if they did not achieve the indicator. Zero is the lowest possible
overall score, 10 is the highest. The data for the indicators are from publicly
available sources or were provided from public officials.